E 

"458 






Class _^.^A2^ 



OP 

HON. ROBERT TOOMBS, OF GA., 

DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE U. S. JANUARY 24, ISCO. 



The Senate havlno; vinflcr consiflcration the repohition offered hy Mr. Dorc.LAR, directing the 
Judiciary Committee to report a liill for the protection of each State and Territory against invasion 
hy the authorities and inhabitants of every other State and Territory- 
Mr. TOOMBS said: 

Mr. President and Senators: The legislation proposed by the resolution on 
5'our table opens a new page in the history of our country. Such legislation clearly 
falls within the constitutional powers of Congress, and is a step in the right direc- 
tion. I accept it as an eflbrt to enable the Federal Government to perform its duty 
on this subject b}' preserving peace among these confederate States. But, sir. 1 
fear that the disease lies too deep for the remedy. But it is suggestive, and fur- 
nishes a stand-point from v.'hich we may well survey the state of the Republic — its 
past, its present, and its future. Hitherto this Government has been enabled to 
grapple with and surmount all the difficulties, foreign or domestic, which have im- 
peded its course or threatened its safety. Indeed, before the adoption of t/ie 
present Constitution — in fact, before the adoption of any Federal Government what- 
ever, the spirit of nationality, a common interest, a common danger, carried the 
country nearly through the war of the Revolution. The Articles of Confederation 
were not adop"'ted by all the States, and were not legally binding on any State until tiie 
1st March, 1781, which was within eight months of the brilliant termination of 
hostilities at Yorktown. Very soon after the organization of our existing Govern- 
ment, fierce and earnest party struggles began; men's passion^ were deeply aroused; 
but none felt that the State was in danger. They were then mere party que^tion?; 
n^en then divided on the policy of Jay's treaty, alien and sedition laws, acquisition 
of new territory, the embargo, war with Great Britain, French alliance, taritTs, cur- 
rency, and internal improvements by the Federal Government. Some of these 
questions were of deep importance to society. Some of them rose to the dignify 
of constitutional questions; but none of them involved the existence or permanent 
safety of society; and when subnnitted to the arbitrament of the ballot-box, all men 
acquiesced quietly in the result, because the fundamental principles of the social 
fabric were not affected by the result. 

Now, all this has changed. The feeling of nationality, of loyalty to the State, 
the feeling of a common interest and a common destiny, upon which foundations 
alone society can securely and permanently rest, is gradually but rapidly passing 
away. Hostility to the compact of Union, to the tie which binds us together, 
animates the bosoms, and finds utterance in the tongues of millions of our country- 
men, and leads to the habitual disregard of its plainest duties and obligations. 
Large bodies of men now feel and know that party success involves public danger: 
that^'the result may bring us f^ce to face with revolution. Senators, we all feel it 
in this chamber; we hear it proclaimed here every day; we hear it proclaimed daily 
in the other branch of Congress; we hear it from State Legislatures, from the pul- 
pit and the press, and from popular assemblies throughout the length and breadth 
of this broad land. Impotent threats, such as were made yesterday by the Sena- 
tor from Maine, will not arrest its onward march. Idle gasconade, such as was 
used by the Senator from Iowa, and, I think, by the Senator from Ilhnois, (Mr. 
Trumbull,) and their associates in this and the other House of Congress, to put it 
down by the strong arms of their constituents, will not arrest its steady advance. 
G. S. Gideon, Printer, 511 Ninth street, Washington. 



^-fS 



TcT 



I would only suggest to them that it may be wise to reserve their boastings until 
they are returning from the battle — Divine wisdom cautions even the brave against 
using them in goiiig into battle. The public danger can only be averted by the re- 
moval of its real causes. 

These causes are plain, palpable, apparent to the lowest comprehension. The 
fundamental principles of the system of our social Union are assailed, invaded, and 
threatened with destruction ; our ancient rights and liberties are in danger ; the 
peace and tranquillity of our home shave been invaded by lawless violence, and 
their further invasion is imminent; the instinct of self-pers-ervation arouses society 
to their defence. These are the causes which are undermining, and which, if not 
soon arrested, will overthrow the Republic. The effect of this state of public af- 
fairs is so well portrayed by an eminent English writer, that I will take the liberty 
of quoting a paragraph from him. I read from Mr. Mill, on the Logic of the Moral 
Sciences, page 5S'2: 

••The second condition of permanent political society has been found to be the existence, in some 
form or other, of the feeling of loyaltv. This feeling may vary in its objects, and is not confined 
to any particular form of goverHmcnt; but whether in a democracy or in a monarchy, its essence 
is always the same; namely, tliat there be in the constitution of the State something Avhicli is set- 
tled, something permanent and not to be called in question; something which, by general agree- 
ment, has a right to be where it is, and to be secure against disturbance, whatever else may change." 
* * * * "A State never is, nor until mankind are vastly improved 

can hope to be, for any long time exempt from internal dissension; for there neither is nor has ever 
been anj' state of society in which collisions did not occur between the immediate interests and 
passions of powerful sections of the people. What, then, enables society to weather these storms 
f.nd pass through turbulent times without any permanent weakening of the ties which hold it to- 
gether? Precisely this — that, however important the interests about which men fall out, the con- 
flict does not ati'ect the fundamental principles. of the system of social union which happens to ex- 
ist; nor threaten large portions of the community with the subversion of that on which they have 
built their calculations, and with which their hopes and aims have become identified. But when 
the questioning of these fundamental principles is (not an occasional disease, but) the habitual 
condition of the body politic, and when all the violent animosities are called forth, which spring 
naturally from such a situation, the State is virtually in a position of civil war, and can never long 
remain free from it in act and fact." 

That, sir, is our condition to-day. We are virtually in civil war, and these are 
the causes oi it. It is known and felt on this floor. I feel and know that a large 
body of these Senators are enemies of my country. I know they and their associ- 
ates have used the power which has been placed in their hands by many of the 
States, to assail and destroy the institutions of these confederate States. I know 
that under color of the liberty of speech, even in these Halls, day by day, and 
year after year, they have thundered their denunciations against slavery and slave- 
holders, against confederates and their institutions, and thus seek to apply the torch 
to our homesteads, and to desolate our land with servile and internecine war. Sir^ 
the present state of things is no longer compatible with our securit}' nor our honor. 
We demand peace or war. VVe prefer peace; wehave sought it through peaceful 
channels; but though the road to it shall lead through war, we intend to have it. 

We do not charge these wrongs against the Federal Government. There has 
been no time, since its establishment, when it has been truer to its obligations, more 
faithful to the Constitution, than within the last seven years. Its executive and 
judicial departments have firmly maintained the fundamental law in relation to these 
great questions; and the legislative department has approximated the same standard 
nearer than at any other period of our history within the last forty years. And it 
is because of this fidelity to its duty that it is liahitually denoimced by a coalition 
in this country, which is seeking to control it, with intent to make it subservient to 
their treacherous purposes. It is the duty of all patriotic citizens to uphold it, and 
piotect it against such prostitution, f speak to no man as a partisan. I feel but 
small concern about mere party success. Tliese questions rise far above so ignoble 
a ^tandru■(l. I would that all good men^ of every party, avouUI unite und rally 
aronnd the Constitution, and defend this fest bulwark of national safety against these 
public enemies. 

1 hese public enemies are Abolitionists who have formed a coalition with all the 



waifs and strays — deserters of all former political parties — and the better to conceal '[ 
their real purposes have assumed tlie name of the Republican party. This coali- 
tion has but one living, animating principle or bond of union, and that is hatred of 
the people and institutions of the slavchulding States of this Union. This coalition 
has evinced, by its acts, its declaiations, a fixed and determined pur])0>e, in spite 
of the Constitution, in s])ite of solemn engagements to obey and maintain it, 
and in spite of all the obligations which rest on every member of every civilized 
State to limit, to restrain, and finally to subvert, the "institutions of fifteen States 
of the Union. 

Sir, I kiiov*r these are strong cliargcs; I have not made them lightly. I speak in 
sorrow, not in anger; I make them with pain, not pleasure. I feel it a duty I owe 
to my country, to my whole country, to speak the truth plainly, that the people mav 
know and perchance avert the public calamity. I feel deeply the obligation which 
rests upon me to sustain them by clear and irrefragable jiroofs before the Senate, 
the country, and the civilized world; to that duty I now proceed. 

I charge, first, that this organization has annulled and made of none effect a fun- 
damental principle of the Constitution of the United States in manv of the States 
of this Union, and has endeavored, and is endeavoring, to accomplish the same 
result in all the non-slavehokling States. 

Secondly. I charge it with openly attempting to deprive the people of the 
slaveholding States of their equal enjoyment of, and equal rights in, the common 
territories of the United States, as expounded by the Supreme Court, and of seek- 
ing to get the control of the Federal Government, with the intent to enable it 
to accomplish this result by the overthrow of the Federal judiciary. 

Thirdly. I charge that large numbers of persons belonging to this organization 
are daily committing otlences against the people and property of these confederate 
States, which, by the laws of nations, are good and sufficient causes of war even 
among indejiendent States, and Governors and Legislatures of States, elected Lv 
them, have repeatedly committed similar acts. 

Now, for these causes, I maintain that this coalition is unfit to rule over a free 
people; and its j)ossession of the Fed ^rai Government is a just cause of war by the 
people whose safety is thereby put in Jeopard3^ 

The third clause of the second section of the fourth article of the Constitution 
reads as follows: 

"No person held to scrvic-e or labor in any State under the laws thereof, escajung into another, 
shall, in conseqiienee of any law or reoulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, 
but shiiU be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due." 

The second section of the sixth article says: 

"This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance tliereo:'. 
and all treaties made, or whicli shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall '•■ ^• 
the supreme law of the land, and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, anything in •' 
constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding." 

This is the Constitution. It is plain; it is distinct. It needs no commentarv; | 
and if it did, such commentary is to be found in the words of the fathers who put 
the provision there. I have them before me. They are known of all men. 'J'he 
principle did not originate in the Constitution. It has been a fundamental princi- 
ple of society for thirty centuries. It is to be found, also, in the ordinance of Hb?, 
an ordinance called by this organization which chooses to usurp the name of the 
Republican party, a sacred ordinance. It is in the sixth clause of that act. It was 
in the very section which declared that slavery or involuntary servitude, except iu; 
crime, should never exist in the Noithwest Territory, which was put there, in a 
moment of weakness, by the old Confederation. 

Tlfcse hyi)0crites, who affect almost to ascribe Divine origin to this ordinaiic--, 
under which they have been protected and admitted as equals to the Govemmei.t. 
are the first to evade, deny, and elude so much of its obligation as is not conforma- 
ble to their ignorance and narrow prejudices. They use the liberty wherewith we 
have clothed them to bring shame and reproach on themselves and an empire of 



freemen. But, as I have said, this sound principle of public polity had an older 
origin than the ordinance of 1787. In the confederation of the New England States, 
it was adopted as their public law. I will merely advert to the authority. My 
voice will not allow me to read it all. It is apparent that the act of 1793 was al- 
mof-t a transcript of that agreement. It certainly was its foundation; for the simi- 
larity of ideas and language cculd not be accidental- The New England Senators 
who'drafted and voted for the act of 1793 could not have been ignorant of their own 
act of lb43. This is that act: 

"It is filso agreed, that if any servant run aAvaj- from las master into any of these confederate 
jurisdictions, that in such casej upon certificate of one magistrate in the jurisdiction out of which 
"ths said servant fled, or upon other due proof, the said servant shall be delivered either to his mas- 
ter or any otlier that pursues and brings such certificate or proof," Winthrop's New England^ 
vol. 2, pp. 104, 105. 

The Puritan fathers required less evidence to deliver up a fugitive from labor 
than a fugitive from justice by one half. For the delivery of a fugitive from justice, 
they required the certificate of two magistrates. Who these servants were, I refer 
vou, for further information, to that portion of the history of New England in which 
Vou will find that humnne Indian intercourse law under which they made reprisals 
on the "salvages" for the wrongs they did Christians, by seizing these "salvages," 
(though iheir olMcers were directed to be sparing of seizing vjomen and children',) 
ex])oiting and exchanging them for "neager.s." These prudent Puritans bad not 
studied K^ott and Gliddon, or Morton, or Agassiz on the diversity of races, but ex- 
perience had taught them the superiority of the "neager" over the Indian as an 
available operative; therefore they exported iha Indian and imported the African. 

The act of Congress of 1793, to surrender fugitives from labor, came for adju- 
dication before the Supreme Court, and was there sustained. It was decided to be 
constitutional by every State court in the United States up to the passage of the act 
of 1850, without any exception. It was not only affirmed m the case of Prigg vs. 
Pennsylvania, by the Supreme Court of the United States; not only affirmed to be 
a cous'titutional lav.' by every judicial officer of the Federal Government who ever 
sat on the bench anywhere, at any time, from the formation of the Government 
down, but the judiciary of every non-slaveholding State in the Union affirmed its 
constitutionality, as well as the courts of the slaveholding States. The act of 1793 
was adopted during the administration of Washington. It passed the Senate unani- 
jj^ouslv — was introduced by New England men, and I suppose they got it from the 
source I have indicated. It was ]ias.-ied in the House of Representatives b}' twenty- 
six northern and twenty-two southern men — nearly a unanimous vote in that House. 
It was sio'ned by Washington. It was not questioned until the non-slaveholding 
States beo-an to act under the inlluence of Exeter Hall; their treason was not 
indigenous. These traitors now pretend that the act of 1850 instigated the hostilit}' 
to the rendition of fugitives from labor. 

I will show from the record, that the pretence is untrue; long before that act was 
passed they had passed numerous cunningly contrived and fraudulent acts to 
elude, evade, and defeat this plain constitutional obligation. W^hat dops the act of 
1850 do? It only more effectually provides for the execution of the Constitution, 
and defeats fraudulent State legislation intended to elude its provisions. The con- 
stitutionality of this law has been maintained, as far as I know or believe, bj' every 
Federal court in the Union, and every Slate court also, except that of Wisconsin. 
The decision of that court has recently been brought before the highest judicial 
tribunal of our country. I find in the twenty-first volume of Howard's Su]ireme 
Court Reports two cases decided together, Ableman vs: Booth, and the United 
States vs. Booth. That decision is able, learned, and eloquent. I cannot read all 
of it that I could wish to read. I coinmend it to all honest men; I give enough of 
it to elucidate the point I am discussing: 

"In the case before the supreme court of Wisconsin, a right was claimed under the Constitution 
and laws of the Unitcl States, and the decision w.as against the right claimed; and it refuses oljcdi- 
encc to the writ of error, and regards its own judgment as final. It has not only reversed and 
annulled the judgment of the district court of the riiited States, but it has reversed and anuulkcl 
the provisions of the Constitution itself." — Howard' i Reports, vol, 31, p, 522, 



That is the unanimous juclgmcnt of the whole court, of the northern men and the 
southern men on that heucfi; and there are four northern men on it. They de 
clared that the court of Wisconsin had not only annulled the jiulgment of the dis' 
trict court of the United States, but had reversed and annulled the provisions of the 
Constitution itself. One of the younge>t of our sisters, who got rotten before she 
got ripe, comes to us even in the first few years of her admis?ion, witli iier hands 
all smeared with the blood of a violated Constitution, all polluted with perjury. 

But, say the Supreme Court of the United States, also unanimously, in refereDce 
to the act of 1850: 

"But, altliough we think it unneccs.sarv to (Hfcuss these questions, yet, as thej' have been decided 
by the State court and are before us on the record, and we are not willing to be inisniidersfood, it 
is proper to say lliat, in the judj^mcnt of tliis court, the act of ('on<2;re.ss commonly called the fii;(itive 
slave law is, in all its provisions, fully authorized by the Constitution of the United States." — HjUI, 
page 526. 

Such is the judgment of the whole court. No honest man denies, or even ques- 
tions, its soundness or its purity. It is the sole arbiter created by the Constitutic n 
of our country to decide upon the private rights of the people of one State against 
the people of another State under the Constitution. The highest judicial tribunal of 
Wisconsin refuses to obey this decision; the State sustains them, and has the audacity 
to send Senators here to look honest inen in the face, and prate about union. Their in- 
sensibility to shame excites more of our pity than our contempt. Mr. President, I 
hold in my hand copies and abstracts of laws, resolutions and bills of nine States of this 
Union, all of which have been devised with the direct intent to abrogate and annul this 
plain pjovision of the Constitution. The laws were passed by the Abolitionists, now 
called the Republican party of the United States. They are all plain, direct, un- 
deniable violations of the oaths which the men who passed them took to support the 
Constitution of the United States. All of them display the scienter, the corrupt 
knowledge of those that passed them, of the crimes they were committing. Their 
very efforts to hide, to conceal their purpose, demonstrate their criminal intent. I 
shall not detain the Senate with reading this sad catalogue; but I shall comment on 
the most atrocious of these laws, and annex abstracts of them to m}' jirinted speech, 
with references to enable the reader to investigate this humiliating record of de- 
pravity. 

Their objects are sometimes sought to be accomplished by resolutions proclaim- 
ing a J'higher law" as the guide to pliant judicial interpretation. In other cases 
they are sought to be accomplished by habeas corpus acts, by writs of mandamus^ 
intended to tranfer cases from the judgment of honest men to the decisions of Re- 
publicans; but t{ie bolder criminals have squarely met the question, and annulled 
the Constitution by means of what are called personal liberty acts. Maine, New 
Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Michigan, Wis- 
consin, Iowa, Ohio, and New York, have all sought to accomplish these results 
in the one or the other of the modes wliich I have described. I have not the 
Iowa and Wisconsin laws before me. I am informed they are of the same char- 
acter, purpose, and intent.* The State of INIaine, by section 53,' chapter SO, 
of Revised Code, fines every honest man in her limits who regards his obligation 
id the Federal compact, and holds State otfice under her, $1,000, or imprisons 
him not less than one year, for maintaining, or attempting to maintain, this 
provision of the Constitution. No person in Maine can enter upon the discharge 
of any office, civil or military, who does not take an oath to support the Con- 
stitution of the United States. If he chooses to regard the obligations of his oath 
and the duties of a good citizen, he is fined $1,000 or put in prison. .Maine 
offers to her office-holders, in the discharge of national obligations, the alternative 
of perjury or a prison. I never heard of a Republican in the State who accepted 
the latter alternative. 

Massachusetts commenced her career of crime as early as March 24, IS 13, and 

*Mr. Tconbs is glad to be told by the Senator from Iowa, that she has passed no law attempt- 
ing to nullify this clause of the Constitution. 



\ 



6 

has continued it up to 1858. Infidelity to the Federal compact is the rule of con- 
duct of her public men of the Republican party; and open, shameless disregard of 
^their oaths to support the Constitution, as far as the fugitive slave law is con- 
cerned, is their best passport to popular favor. New Hampshire frees every fugi- 
tive from labor who may escape into her borders, unless the act of reclamation be 
done by some ofiicer of the United States, or other person in the execution of any 
legal process. The Constitution says, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in 
Pngg vs. Pennsylvania, she shall not. Her public men swear they will support 
the Constitution. By her legislation, she would imprison any one of her southern 
"brethren," five years for passing through her borders accompanied by his body 
servant; yet I am considered a rash, violent man, a disunionist, for not accepting 
such people as my brethren. (See laws of New Hampshire, Chapter 195(5, June 
session, 1857.) The people of Vermont would seize my servant under similar 
circumstances, and the State pledges its whole power to defend him. Michigan 
would imprison any southern man by her laws for passing through her territory 
with his domestic servant. She has been otherwise extremely active in her legis- 
lation to subvert the Constitution. Rhode Island has offered her officers, civil and 
military, the same alternatives allowed them by Maine, to wit, perjury or a prison. 
Connecticut has passed characteristic laws, under the fraudulent pretence of pre- 
venting kidnapping. She fines all persons $5,000 and imprisons them five years 
for failing, in their suit, to recover their slave property; and takes good care, by 
her rules of evidence and the tribunals before whom she attempts to bring them, 
that they shall fail. 

Mr. FOSTER. Will the Senator permit me to ask him a question ? 

Mr. TOOMBS. Certainlv. 

Mr. FOSTER. The Senator has alluded to the State of Connecticut. I should 
be obliged to him if he would point out the act of the State of Connecticut which 
he claims to be unconstitutional. I ask it, merely that I may have my attention 
drawn to it. 

Mr. TOOMBS. I will. In Connecticut persons were prohibited from bringing 
slaves into the State, under a penalty of $350 for each slave; and the State au- 
thorities were prohibited from arresting or detaining fugitives from slavery, by the 
act of 1854. 

Mr. FOSTER. I will ask the Senator if he will not read the act, to see whether 
the prohibition of bringing slaves into the State be not to sell or dispose of them — 
whether that is not the whole provision to which he refers. It merely prevented 
the bringing in slaves to sell or dispose of them. 

Mr. TOOMBS. I will read them all: "An act for the defence of liberty in this 
State," passed in Connecticut, April, 1854 — 

Mr. FOSTER. It is the act, the title of which he just read, to which I call his 
attention. 

Mr. TOOMBS. You stopped me before I got through with the black list. The 
act passed in 1854, entitled "An act for the defence of liberty in this State," to be 
found in your compilation of 1S54, page 978, is the most artfully contrived, cun- 
ningly devised, the most fraudulent act of any of those to which iny attention has 
been drawn. Many acts of your co-conspirators exceed it in boldness, none in 
meanness and infamy. I have already described it, and leave it to you to defend. 
It does furtively and clandestinely, what the New York bill did openly. It did not 
require of its supporters to gulj) down wholesale peijury, like the New York bill; 
but it did lequire them to do the same thing in a more indirect manner. I will 
now >how what was attempted in New York. 

Mr. COLLAMER. If the Senator will indulge me a moment, I merely wish to 
ask him to give me the dates of those acts of \'ermont to which he has alluded. 

Mr. TOOiMBS. I do not wish to be interrupted. I have referred to them all 
by date. I will attach them to my speech. I have examined some of them my- 
self, and have had copies taken from others, under my direction, by a competent 
person. 



Mr. COLLAMER. I merely asked t!ie date of them. 

Mr. TOOMBS. I will give them to you with pleasure when I have done, but I 
cannot o;o hack for that puipose. 

Mr. President. I have chara;ed these acts of perfidy upon these States — they are 
all proved by the records; but I must stop here, to do justice (o lari^e numbers of 
patriotic men in those States, who stru2;gled manfully to keep their faith with their 
confederates. These things were almost wholly done by the Republican party; but 
few of the Americans and none of the Democrats, as far as I know, aided or abetted 
these iniquities. Whenever the Republicans have had power, notwithstanding their 
sacred oaths to maintain the Constitution, they have pioved false to it, and have 
perpetrated these crimes. In Indiana and Illinois, in California and Oregon, they 
have never had power; and the Constitution, by that fact alone, has been preserved 
from desecration in those States. The same has been true of IMinnesota and Penn- 
sylvania and New Jersey. Even in States where they have not political power, 
every man knows, in the sections of such States where they have the majority, they 
accomplish by violence what they cannot do by law. Theft and murder are their 
ordinary means of defeating the Constitution, where they are not strong enough to 
pass laws; and every man knows that the fugitive slave law is a dead letter ni the 
non-slaveholding States, except where the Democrats have power, or are in the 
majority in the locality where it is attempted to be enforced. In Ohio, the Black 
Republicans passed similar laws, but the Democrats repealed them; but I ^ee that 
the Republican govei-nor has recommended their re-enactment. 

Mr. WADE. I have no doubt they will reinstate them at the first opportunity 
in Ohio. 

Mr. TOOMBS. I have no doubt of it either. They have showed themselves 
capable of any violation of the Constitution of their country, and they have shown 
that no oaths can bind them to maintain the compact. I do not doubt it. I do not 
doubt they will do it in every State where they have the power, and I have no 
doubt they will treat the Constitution in the same way if they get power here; and 
for that reason I trust they will never get it while there is a drop of blood in a true 
heart from here to the Rio Grande. It is because I know they will do it, it is be- 
cause I have demonstrated that they will do it, that I say we are brought face to 
face with revolution in that contingency. In New York, the Republican party, at 
the last session of the Legislature, attempted to pass a law^ and did pass it through 
one branch, exceeding those of her associates in this Union in iniquity, in plain, 
open, shameless, and profligate perfidy, as far as she exceeds them in population 
and wealth. I will thank my colleague to read for me the several sections I will 
indicate. 

Mr. IVERSON read, as follows: 

"Sec. 3. Whenever any person in this State shall be deprived of liberty, arrested, or detained, on 
the ground that such person owes service or labor to anotlier person not an inhabitant of this State, 
either partv may claim a trial by jury, and shall have twenty peremptory challeno-es, and m addi- 
tion thereto the other challenges to which a person indicted in this State is entitleil. 

"Sec. 4. Everv person who shall deprive, or attempt to deprive, any other person ot his or Her 
liberty, contrarv to tlic provisions of the preceding section of this act, shall ''eg;^iiiltv ot a telon;,, 
and shall, on conviction thereof, be subjected to a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars, nor less 
than one thousand dollars, and by imprisonment in the State prison for a term not exceeding 
twentv vears nor less than five years : Provided, that nothing in said preceding sections sliall ap- 
ply to, or aftect, the right to arrest or imprison for any contempt of court. 

"Sec. 6. Everv person who may have been held as a slave, who shall come or be brought, or ue 
in this State with the consent of his or her alleged master or mistress, or u/w shall come or bcbrougia, 
or he in this Slate, shall be free. . 

"Seo. 1. Every person' who shall hold, or attempt to hold, in this State, in slavery or as ft 
slave, or any free person in any form, or ibr any time, however short, under the ju-ctence that sucli 
person is or has been a slave, shall, on conviction thereof, be imprisoned in the Mate prison loi a 
term not less than five years nor more tlian twenty years, and be fined not less tliau one thousana 
dollars, nor more than ten thousand dollars. , , xi i „<• 

"Sec. 9. No person, while holding anv office of honor, trust, or emolument, under the laws ot 
this State, shall in any capacity issue any warrant or other process, or grant any cerUhcate, under 
or bv virtue of an act of the Congress of the United States, approved the r2th day ot l-cbruary, A 
D. 1793, entitled 'An act respecting fuuitives from justice and persons escaping from the service ot 



8 

their masters,' or under and by virtue of an act of said Congress, approved the 18th day of Sep- 
tember, A. D. 1850, entitled 'An act to amend and supplementary to An act respecting tugitives 
from justice, or persons cscajiing from the service of their masters,' or shall in any capacity serve 
any sucli warrant or other process." 

Mr. TOOMBS. That will answer. Those sections give a fair sample of the 
bill. The balance of the clauses of this bill are of the saine character. You will 
perceive a citizen of a slaveholding State could not cross over from the Jersey 
shore to a British steamer lying on the New York side of the North river, with his 
servant, without being treated as a felon, and fined and imprisoned in the Peniten- 
tiary. 

Mr. KING. If the Senator will excuse me, I ask him if he will give me the 
date of the passage of the law ? 

JNIr. TOOMBS. I have already said it did not become a law; it gives me great 
pleasure to answer any question which may be asked in good faith, and with the 
honest intent to get at a fact or opinion; but courtesy is entitled to good faith. The 
bill passed the House of Representatives of New York, 84 to '2'2. It did not pass 
the Senate; I do not find final action on it in that House; I have heard outside of 
the record that the Black Republican majority was small in that House — probably 
not more than two or three — and that two of them refused to vote for a bill so 
clearly and palpably violative of the Constitution of the United States. But it 
answers the purpose tor which I want it as well, as it now stands, as it would have 
done had it become a law. I am showing the principles and policy of this party. 
I am trying them by the votes they have given under oath, in their own Legisla- 
ture. They are representative men. As far as I have been able to ascertain the 
party position of the names on the record, the bill was voted for by the Republicans 
in a body in the House, and voted against by every Democrat on the record. 
This, I again repeat, does not appear on the record; and if I am misinformed, I 
would like to be corrected. 

JNIr. KING. The manner in which the gentleman speaks of the disposition I had 
is strange. My disposition was simply to ascertain the tact. He states now that 
the bill passed one House and did not pass the other. 

Mr. TOOMBS. I said so at first. The Senator might not have heard me. 

Mr. KING. I thought you spoke of it as a law. 

iMr. TOOMBS. No; I spoke of it as having passed one House by a vote of 84 
to 22. I spoke from memory on that point. As to the party position of the voters, 
I of course learn that from outside sources; but I have no doubt of its substantial 
correctness. I understand that, of the atfirmative vote, all belonged to one party — 
the Republican party. They voted to annul both laws, that of 1793 and that of 
ISoO, by name. The bill failed in the Senate; the party was not quite strong 
enough there to consummate this iniquity. It may be that the very able report of 
Mr. Diven against it may have caused even some Republicans to pause in their 
career of faithlessness and perfidy. ' 

Now, sir, I have shown you what has been done on this question by these 
States under Republican rule; what Ohio has done, and what she promises to do 
again — what her Senator [Mr. VVade] says she will do. I have shown you what 
the Republican party of New York voted to do; and on this evidence I demand 
judgment of the country, whether I have not fully sustained the first charge 1 have 
made against them. I nave proved their utter disregard of their constitutional ob- 
ligations, and that it is their fixed policy, as a party, to defeat that clause of the 
Constitution which requires the rendition of fugitives from labor. I do not say 
even that all persons belonging to that organization have actively participated in 
these high crimes and misdemeanors. Some pej'sons may be among them and not 
of them. Even to such as these I would not be unjust. Let them come out from 
among them, and enli-t under the banner of the Constitution. This organization 
protests against being tried by the declarations of individual men, by unauthorized 
j)ersons, even in political union with it. I admit the force of the plea, and I sought 
and find their policy in their united action, as indicated by the great majority of the 
party acting in high official positions and under the sanction of oaths. 



I have not sought to bind them by the cry of the mob; I hare not gone to their 
pulpits, and brought up against thetn the wiki ravings and revilings of their spiritual 
teachers, who every Sabbath desecrate the temples erected to the living God. I 
have tried and convicted them by the record, it has lately become the l'a?-liion 
with ollicial members of this party at tbe national capital to disavow as radical Ab- 
olitionists, those who are imprudent in proclaiming j)lai;ily their policy. Tliey seek 
to discard this branch of the family. 1 muit expose their ingratitude as well as 
their injustice to these sappers and miners, the advance guard of the Kepublicaa 
armies. There is a difference between the Republicans and this radical school of 
Garrison and Phillips Abolitionists; but the difference is in favor of the latter. The 
Garrison and Phillips school say our Constitution is pro-slavery; that it does re(juire 
the .-urrender of fugitives from labor; therelbre we can take no oath to sup[)ort it, 
and can vote for no man who will take such oaths, either to keep or break them. 
This advance guard of the army boldly assaults the Constitution itself. Their con- 
duct in this resjject stands out in honoraljle contra.st with their allies who lake oaths 
to support the Constitution, and then break them. 

Sir, I have said this was not a new principle introduced into our Constitution. 
The Constitution but affirmed a great principle which civilized society had for more 
than twenty centuries found necessary to its peace and security. I have shown 
that it wasinserted in the ordinance of 17S7, before the Constitution was adopted. 
I have shown that the New England confederation adopted it in 1643. The su- 
preme judicial tribunal of Prussia affirmed it as the public law of Europe as late as 
1855 or 1S56. It was acknowledged to be a sound principle of jjublic law in the 
days of Pericles, and its violation by one of the States of Greece was the 
chief cause of the Peloponnesian war, which devastated Greece for twenty-one 
years. I ask the favor ol my colleague to read from Thucydides the passages 
which I have marked. 

Mr. IVERSON read, as follows: 

"After this, the}- sent embassariors again to Athens, commanding tliem to levy the siege from 
before Potida' and to suffer .Egina to be free; Init principally, and'nio.st plainly telling tliein that 
the war should not be made in case they would abrogate the act conceniiug the Mcgarean?. By 
which act they were forbidden both the fairs of Attica and all ports within the Athenian domia- 
ion. But the Athenians would not obey them, neither in the rest of their commands nor iu the 
abrogation of that act; but recriminated the Megareans for having tilled holy ground, and unset- 
out with bounds, and for receiving of their slaves that revolted. But at length, when the last 
embassadors from Lacedemon were arrived, namely: Rhamphias, Melcsippus, and Agesandcr, and 
spake nothing of that which formerly they were wont, but only this, that 'the Lacedemonians 
desire that thcTC should be peace, which may be had, if you will suffer the Grecians to be governed 
by their own laws.' the Athenians called an assembly, and propounding their opinions amongst 
themselves, thought good, after they had debated the matter, to give them an answer once for all. 
And mauv stood forth and delivered their minds on either side — some for the war, and some that 
this act concerning the Megareans ought not to stand in their way to peace, but to be abrogated; 
and Pericles, the son of Xantippus, the principal num at that time of all Atheu.5, and most suffi- 
cient both for speech and action, gave his advice in such manueV as followeth." — Ilohhts's Thucy- 
dides, page 69. 

Mr TOOMBS. This is the narrative of Thucydides, giving the causes of the 
Peloponnesian war. The Megareans had given refuge to the revolted slaves of 
Athens. She was in alliance with Sparta. Athens had forbidden trade and com- 
merce with her until she gave up those slaves, Sparta sent her embassadors to 
Athens, and told her to withdraw that decree. Finally, the Lacedemonians said: If 
you will withdraw your decree against the Megareans, in the matter of the fugitive 
slaves, we shall have peace. The matter was debated. Some then said it was a 
small matter; we will give it up. Pericles addressed the people; and I call your 
attention to a few words of his, announcing a principle which deserves the immor- 
tality it has won: 

"Now, let none of you conceive that we shall go to war for a trifle, by not abrogating the act 
concerning Megara, (yet this bv them is pretended most, and that, for the abrogation of it, the war 
shall stayf) nor retain a scruple in your minds, as if a small matter moved you to the war; for even 
this small matter contained the trial and constancy of your resolution, wherein, if you give them 
way you shall hereafter be commanded a greater matter, as men that fear will obey them likewise 
in that. But by a stiff denial, you shall teach them plainly to como to you hereafter on terms of 



mtm 



10 



more equality. Resolve, therefore, from this occasion, either to yield them obedience before you 
receive damage, or, if we must have war, (which, for my part, I think is best,) l)e the pretence 
weiprhty or lio-ht, not to give way nor keep what we possess in fear. For a great and a little 
claim, imposed by equals upon their neighbors, before judgment, by way of command, hath one and 
the same virtue to make subject." — Il/ici, page TO. 

The Creeks, tovo, under their leao;ue, had an arbiter, to whom this class of dis- 
putes m]<rhi be referred. This noble old Greek saw the importance of a principle. 
Some of his countr^'men thought it too small an affair to lead to war; but his sound 
and eloquent argument was listened to and affirmed in the assemby of the people, 
and his policy was adopted. The Athenians greatly and wisely determined to vin- 
dicate this principle, and go to war rather than surrender it. That war brought 
unnumbered woes on all Greece. Even if I had full knowledge that the same result 
would happon to my country, I would repeat Pericles' advice to my countrymen. 
If Grecian liberty has slept in the tomb of twenty centuries, it slept without dis- 
honor; if it peiished, it did not perish ingloriously. 

Sir, I will conclude this branch of the subject by reading an extract frrm a speech 
of one of our own great lights, which has but recently gone out; a man to whom 
the high honor of being the great exi)ouiKler of the Constitution was assigned by a 
large portion of the intellect and patriotism of his generation; a man whose fidelity 
to the Constitution of his country lost him the confidence of New England. I need 
not say I mean the late Daniel VVebster. In his speech of the 28th of .June, 1851, 
at Capon Springs, Virginia, Mr. Webster said: 

"I do not hesitate to say and repeat that, if the Northern States refuse, wilfully and deliberately, 
to carry into effect that part of the Constitution which respects the restoration of fugitive slaves, the 
South would no longer be bound to observe the comi)act. A bargain broken on one side is broken 
on all sides." 

I say the bargain is broken — broken by the States whose policy I have reviewed; 
broken by the Republican party, who did the work in their legislatures and else- 
where. Their hands are soiled with the blood of the compact — they cannot be 
permitted to administer at its altars. I know not that it was even necessary to 
prove this point of the case. I doubt much whether the members of that party will 
deny the fact that it is their fixed policy never to carry out, in good faith, this part 
of the bargain. I doubt if there be five, out of all the members of the Republican 
party on this floor, who will stand up here to- day, and say they are willing, either 
by State or Federal legislation, or in any other manner, to uphold and comply with 
this provision of the Constitution. I do not believe there are enough to meet God's 
final requisition to save Sodom. No, sir; they mock at constitutional obligations, 
jeer at oaths. They have lost their shame with their virtue, and no longer feel hu- 
miliated at the commission of these great crimes. I leave this point, w-ith a demand 
for the compact. In the name of the people whom I represent, I deinand the bond. 
In the name of every true and honest man in the North, as well as the South, I 
demand the redemption of your plighted faith. 

I come, now, to the second point. These Black Republicans say they are op- 
posed to the extension of slavery, and tl.ey seem to wish it mostly on account of 
their reverence for the "fathers of the Republic." I shall not at this time argue 
fully the territorial questions. I have already done so once in each branch of 
Congress, and my arguments are on the record. I seek now only to expose the action 
of the Republican party in relation to them These Hartford Convention Federalists 
hypocritically pretended great reverence for Washington, Jelferson, and Madison. 
They stoned the prophets when they were alive, and claim salvation through 
them when dead. This has happened before. It is true, that many of the lead- 
ing men in the Revolution from the South were opposed to slavery. I think 
one of the objections which Luther Martin, a delegate to the constitutional con- 
vention from Maryland, urged against the adoption of the Federal Constitution, 
was, that it tolerated the slave trade, and, perhaps, that it did not give the power 
to Congress to abolish slavery. But that is evidence of what the Constitution really 
was, a pro-slavery fundamental law. Washington, Jefferson, and Madison, all ex- 



Jl 



pressed opinions against slavery, but none of them ever pretended tliat the Con- 
stitution, in any way whatever, or in any degree whatever, provided either for re- 
straining, limiting, or abolishing it. All three of thctn lived and died slaveholders. 
It is true, that Washington eniancii)aled his slaves by his will, to take cllect after 
the death of his wife. That is no uncommon event in the South; indeed it be- 
came so common that my own State, and the Southern States, generally, were 
compelled to restrain or prohibit this light. 

Such is the relation between master and slave, that it is a common feeling with 
slaveholders not to permit their slaves to belong even to collaterals of their own 
families. Even when a slaveholder like Washington has no direct descendants, 
the law, in conformity to public polic}', forbids or controls this strong tendency to 
emancipate. For forty years, (Georgia has had lo interpose by law to cheek this 
feeling, and prevent the Commonwealth being overrun by a free negro pof)iilation. 
These fraudulent pretendei*s to the principles of these patriots have seized upon the 
personal opinions of these patriots, and attem{)t to ingraft them on the jMjlicy of 
the Republic, in direct violation of the Constitution. Washington, having no di- 
rect descendants, emancipated his slaves; left them that "heritage of woe;" and 
the result has been, nearly the whole of them are extinct, and the survivors are 
a curse to themselves aild the communities among which they are cast. Jefferson 
died a slaveholder, and left his slaves to his heirs and creditors. Madison died a 
slaveholder, and lelt his slaves to his widow and other persons. Washington, by 
no word or act of his life countenanced the dogma that the Constitution of the 
United States gave the least authority to the Federal Government to limit, or re- 
strain, or abolish slavery. John Adams, in 1798, extended the ordinance of 17S7 
over all the territory owned by the United States by virtue of the war of inde- 
pendence, expressly excluding the anti-slavery clause of that ordinance. Does 
New England repudiate her own fathers ? If she does, let her not slander mine. 

Jefferson acquired a slave territory larger than all the rest of the Union put 
together. He bought this slave territory, protected it, nurtured it, extended sla- 
very over it, by protecting all slaveholders in any of the then existing States in 
emigrating to and settling in it. Under his policy Louisiana came into the Union; 
Missouri was trained for admission; and when she was prepared for it Mr. Jeffer- 
son had retired to Monticello. But the voice of northern Federalism reached his 
retreat; and he sternly rebuked the evil spirit which he had quelled during his 
administration, but which again dared to rai~e its treasonable crest. 

Jefferson was alive when the eighth section of the act of 1820 was before the 
American Congress. He spoke for himself. In the face of your constant decla- 
rations — cold, calculating, wilful misrepresentations of him — hear him speak for 
himself. I thunder it in your ears. I would to God my voice could reach those 
whom you deceive and betray. 

In his letter to John Holmes, of Maine, dated 29th April, 1820, Mr. Jefferson 
strongly condemned both the geographical line and the attempt to prevent "the 
diffusion of slavery over a greater surface;" and adds: 

"Au abstinence, too, from this act of pow^er would remove the jealously excited by the under- 
taking of Congress to regulate the condition of the different descriptions of men composing a State. 
This certainly is the exclusive right of every State, which nothing in the Constitution has taken 
from them and ^iven to the General Governraent. Could Congress, for example, say that the 
non-freeraea of Connecticut should be freemen, and that they shall not emigrate into any other 
State?" 

This was his argument in favor of extension, He then goes on to denounce the 
restriciionists of his day as political suicitlcs, and traitors "against the hopes of the 
woild." Such were the opinions entertained by the author of the ordinance of 
1787, of the Missouri restriction of 1820. 

Again, Mr. Jefferson, in a letter to Mr. Madison, says: 

"I am indebteil to you for your two letters of February 7 and 19. This Missouri question, by 
a geographical line of division, is the most portentous one I li»ve ever conlemi)lated." * * 

* [Generally understood to be Rufus King] "is ready to risk the Uniom for any 
chance of restoring his party to power, and wriggling himself to the head of it; nor is" * • 

* * "without his Lopes, nor scrupulous as to the means of fulfilling them." 



13 

JMr. Madison also, In a letter to Mr. INIonroe, in 1820, says: 

"On OIK' siile it naturally otcurs, that tlie liulit, being given from the necessity of the case, and y 
in suspension of the great iirinciple of self-government, ought not to be extended further, nor con- 
tiuucd longer, than the occasion might fairly- require." 

Mr. Madison says further: 

"The ((iiestions to he deciiled seem to be — 

"I. Whether a territorial restriction be an assumjition of illegitimate power; or 

"2. A misuse of legitimate power; and, if the latter only, whether the injury threatened to the 
nation from an acquiesi-ence in the misuse, or from a frustration of it, he the greater. 

'"ttn the first point, there is certainly room for dift'erence of opinion; though, for myself, I must 
own that 1 have always leaned to the belief that the rtslridion was not wit/tin the true .sroj.ie of the 
Constitution y 

These ate JefTerson's and Madison's denunciation of congressional prohibition — 
the identical question; and these men have the audacity to stand before the civil- 
ized world, even in the assemblies of their countrymen, where at least there ought 
to be some intelligence, and say their principles are in conformity with the policy of 
the early fathers. The audacity of mendacity can be carried no further. 

I have already shown you the practices of Jefferson. Mr. Madison's were in 
perfect harmony with those of his friend Jefferson. Perhaps no man of the Rev- 
olution knew as well the whole scope, intent, and meaning of the Constitution, as 
Mr. iVIadison. He is often called its father. Yet this bastard tribe of Abolition- 
ists, with untnistakable natural marks of their own paternity, dare to call him one 
of their lathers! Mr. Madison bore express testimony to the direct fact that this 
principle of the party is against the Constitution of the country. Sirs, if you 
will continue your mad career, if you are determined to ruin your country, I would 
even invoke you to spare the honest memories of the illustrious dead. You can 
no longer deceive any man by your slanders upon these patriots; the falsity of your 
accusation against them is known to all of you; have at least reverence enough to 
cease to utter it. If you respect the fathers of the Republic, imitate their example 
and policy. These fathers required, in the treaty which acknowledged their inde- 
pendence, that England should not carry off slaves or other property. Unite with 
us to make England break up her Aen of thieves in Canada; that would be imita- 
ting the example of the fathers. The fathers even of New England voted to con- 
tinue the slave trade for twenty years. They got something or nothing for it; if 
something, pay it; if nothing, ^tand for their honor. We did not bring them in 
with the idea that you would either steal them or confiscate them. Was that 
your under^tanding of the bargain? The fathers said they would suppress insurrec- 
tions. We do not think the events at Harper's Ferry are in strict conformity with 
that understanding. 

But, sir, for every abolition enormity the Black Republicans have a stereotyped 
plea, either in mitigation or in bar. They say, upon the happening of every new 
outrage, every time they violate the compact, every time a new underground rail- 
road company is started, every time any new outrage is perpetrated upon us, or a 
new raid conceived or accomplished, that all this comes of the repeal of the Mis- 
souri restriction; that was the Pandora's box which opened afresh this slavery agi- 
tation. Well, grant it; what was that act of atrocity w-hich is pleaded in release 
of all constitutional obligations, in excuse for treason, murder, and ai^on? It was 
this: the Congress of the United States, by the concurrence of the legislative and 
executive departments of the Government, repealed the eighth section of the act 
of 1820, which i)rohibiled slavery in all territories of the United States acquired 
from France, lying north of 36° 30' north latitude, and outside of Missouri, com- 
monly called the Missouri restriction. This pretended law, which we repealed, 
ha.s been decided by the Supreme Court of the United States to have been nw//, 
vcjid, and no lavj. We said that it was not law; the Supreme Court said it w^as not 
law, but a usurpation of power by Congress. This was not only our judgment, but 
the judgment of the highest jbdicial tribunal of our country. They decided that 
it was unconstitutional to put it on the statute-book, and therefore unconstitutional 
to keep it there; then, because we would not let an unconstitutional act stain any 



13 

page on ilie statute-book, we have the curses of the Rpi)ub]ican parly and their 
base allies. "The head and front of our oflcnding h.ath this extent, "no more." 
This is our unpardonable sin. If our fidelity to the Constitution which we had 
sworn to support is the charge against us, we plead guilty to it. 

I am not surj)rised that the support of the Constitution should be adjudged a 
crime by this coalition. With such a brand upon them, they ask us to submit to 
their rule if they have a majority. They are kind enough to ask us, "let us be 
brothers, or we will cut your tliroats — that is, if we can get 3'our nej^roes to do it." 
They place great reliance on this arm of the Black Republican phalanx. When 
they get ready for this brotherly work, in the name and behalf of my constituents 
I extend to them a cordial invitation to come down to see us. But it is due to 
candor to say that their reputation needs some building up among my constituents. 
We do not think those men the most dangerous who are the most faithless to their 
compacts; and, in very truth, we have but small fear of men, even as leaders of 
untold millions, who have not manhood enough to maintain and defend their own 
honors. We are charged with raising in our demands upon the Government, of 
asserting new and unheard-of doctrines in relation to our rights in the/Territories. 
The charge is equally baseless with all the rest that have been made by our adver- 
saries. 1 stand to-day, on the territorial question, where I stood in 1850. I ask 
my colleague to read the extracts which I have marked from a speech delivered 
by me in the House of Representatives on the 27th February, 1850. 

Mr. IVEKSON read, as follows: 

"Thon<ili hostile interference is the point of resistance, non-interference is not tlie measnre of our 
rights. We are entitled to non-interference from alien and foreig:n Governments. Enj^'land owes 
us that much: France owes ns that much; Russia ovres us non-intervention. You owe us more. 
You owe us protection. Yv'ithhold it, and you make us .aliens in our own Government. Our bos- 
tility to it, tlien, becomes a necessity — a necessity justified by our honor, our interests, and our 
common safety." — •Appendix to Covgres^iomd G/oic, Jirst ses/tinn T/iirti/-First Coiiyress, page 201. 

"We only ask that our common Government shall protect us both equally until the Territories 
shall be ready to be admitted as States into the Union, then to leave the citizens free to adoi)t any 
domestic policy in reference to this subject which in their judgment may best promote their interest 
and their happiness. The demand is just. Grant it, and you place _Y0ur prosjjcrity and ours upon 
a solid foundation ; yon perjietuate the Union, so necessary to your pros])ei-ity: you solve the true 
problem of republican Government; you V!ndic;'.te the power of constitutional guarantees to protect 
political rights against the will of majorities." 

Mr. TOOMBS. Ten years' experience has not altered or modified these opin- 
ions. I stand to-day where I did then. I have no advance, no retreat to make 
from this ground. It was, in my judgment, right then; it is right to-day and for- 
ever; it is equality and justice planted in the coinpact of Union. Upon these 
terms I have ever been willing to let the Union stand, but upon no other. The 
Federal Governinent is now discharging its duty on this territorial question; if upon 
subordinate questions we should disagree, I agreed, and now agree, to let the judi- 
cial tribunals decide between me and my friends. I agreed, in the act of 1854, to 
abide that decision; I shall continue faithful to that obligation to the end. If the 
Republican party had ])ower in the Government, how couid they carry out their 
own principles in the Territories.? The Supreme Court have already decided that 
congressional prohibition of slavery in the Territories is unconstitutional, and there- 
fore null and void. Therefore, if they were again to pass such an xinconstitutional 
law, they must do it against this decision. They can only succeed in their policy 
by subverting that tribunal. Flence I have established my second proposition, that 
this party not only seeks power to violate one of the fundamental principles of the 
Constitution, but in order to deprive the slaveholding States of their just and equal 
rights in the Territories, have conspired to reach their base ends by subverting the 
judiciary of our country. It is the only road to their avowed ends. They stand, 
then, convicted of the second specification against them. 

My third charge against this Black Republican organization is, that great num- 
bers of persons belonging to it, both in othce and out of olhce, are daily perpetrating 
offences against their confederate States, which even among independent nation* 



14 

afTord just and sufficient cause for public war. It is clear that the peace of the 
country cannot long be maintained under such a state of things. The people of no. 
independent State have the right to attempt, by word or deed, to injure or destroy - 
the Government or people of any other country, nor in any manner whatever to 
disturb their tranquillity, or weaken their security. These of themselves are good 
and sufficient causes of war among nations; but these people have gone further. 
They daily attempt, by words and deeds, by counsel and pecuniary means, by the 
shelter and protection which they give, by law and without law, to the aclive partici- 
pants in their schemes, to excite servile and civil war in the slaveholding States, 
and to subvert their institutions, to devastate the land by fire and sword. It is 
not necessary to read authority to sustain my position even us to the least criminal 
of these acts. The laws of nations, as well as the Divine law, writ(> these princi- 
ples indelibly upon the hearts and consciences of all good men. All the endnent 
publicitts of the world maintain them. Black Republican Governors of the northern 
States annually denounce our institutions, and advise measures to subvert them. 

Black Republican Legislatures are not only daily pouring out their denu.iciations, 
too, against us, but are constantly contriving fraudulent and violent legislative en- 
actments to defeat us of our rights, and protect those of their own citizens who are 
eno'afed in stealing our property. Their Senators and Representatives even in the 
national councils are daily libelling and insulting their confederates, claiming im- 
munity for such acts under the Con.^tItution which they have broken. Many of 
their speeches are calculated and intended to excite servile war. Besides this, at 
least one Senator and sixty-eight Representatives of one House of the national Leg- 
islature have recommended a publication that advises the overthrow of our Govern- 
ment bv force. One of these criminals is now supported for the office of Speaker 
of the House of Representatives by the whole Republican party of that body, and 
their support of him approved by all of the same party in this House. I sa}^ crimi- 
nals; not one of these men can pass over the Potomac river and carry out his own 
recommendation without finding himself at least in the State prison; and they would 
fare even worse under the laws of Georgia. The pulpit, the press, and the lecture- 
room, join in this crusade against the people of the South, and counsel the adop- 
tion of all means to harass, endanger, and destroy us. These are truths seen and 
known of all men. Is this peace? If it is, I prefer war. 

By whom are these things done? Who is responsible for them? The Republi- 
cans say we are not responsible, as a party, for them. Many of them are done by 
the party itself. For those of their crimes against society and the laws which bind 
civilized States together, which are committed by individual members of that party, 
or even by considerable numbers of them, I admit it requires further evidence to 
hold them responsible. I admit that even a State is not bound necessarily for the 
lawless acts of its citizens. Neither is a political party. The latter organization 
cannot ask to be put on a higher basis than an independent State. If the State 
does not punish the aggressors, or deliver them over to the aggrieved party to be 
punished, then she is bound for such acts. So if a political party approves of such 
acts of her members, even does not condemn them, she is justly held responsible 
for them. 

Vattell lays down the law of nations in such cases to be this: 

"But if:i nation or Us (.'iHi-'t' approves and ratifius the act of the individual, it then becomes a 
public concern; and the injured party is to consider the nation as the real autlior of the injury, of 
which the citizen was perhaps only tlic instrument.'' 

I apply the same principle to the Republican party. Do they not support their 
Governors and Legislature, their preachers, their lecturers, and "their press, through 
w^hich instrumentalities all these things are done? Are not the sixty-eight mem- 
bers in the House of Rei)resentatives among them and of them? Do they not sup- 
port John Sherman as Speaker of the House? If these things are true, then the 
Republican party are responsible for all these wrongs and crimes against us. Take 
away those who commit these crimes fiom them, and there is nothing left of the 
party. 

Who is responsible for the treason, murder, and arson of Jolin Brown? I have 



15 

never known of his acts being approved, defended, or palliated by any other per- 
son than a Republican. Thousands of them have done it, and are now doinj^ it. 
In niarshalliag this dark cataloij;ue of crimes against this organization, I would not 
be unjust to it. I have no doubt tliat thousands of persons belonging to their organ- 
ization throrghoul the North loathe and despise this John Brown raid as much as 
the Senator from Maine [Mr. Fessenden] does slavery; but it is equally true, that 
there are other thousands in the same organization wlio do approve it. They tell 
us they condemn his acts, but admire his heroism. I think the Republican party 
must be pressetl for a hero. Newgate calendar can furnish them with any number 
of such saints. To "die game" and not "to peach" are sometimes useful if not 
heroic virtues in an accomplice. The thousands of Black Republicans who do openly 
approve the treason, murder, and arson of John Brown, gi-t no condemnation from 
their party for such acts. They are its main defenders and propagandists all over 
the North, and therefore the [)arty is in moral complicity with the criminal himself. 
No society can long exist in peace under these injuries; hence, we are in virtual 
civil war; hence I denounce their authors, the Republican party, as enemies of 
the Con.-^titution and enemies of my country. 

It is in vain, in face of these injuries, to talk of peace, fraternity, and a common 
country. There is no peace; there is no fraternity; there is no common country. 
I and you, and all of us, know it. My country is not common to the men who coun- 
sel the overtlirow of her system by social and servile war, and all of its attendant 
horrors, and I trust never will be. Sixty-eight members of Congress and one 
Senator, at least, have endorsed these sentiments as contained in the Helper book. 
One of their number is now a candidate for the third office under our Government; 
and I do not know of a Republican in the United States, in Congress or out of it, 
who does not support him. He could not travel in a single slaveholding State, 
from this to Mexico, with whose laws I am acquainted, in which he would not sub- 
ject himself to punishment as a felon if he dared to carry out his own recom- 
mendations. With all these facts, I submit it to the judgment of the Senate, the 
country, and the civilized world, if, according to the public law of all civilized 
nations, we have not just caUse of war against our confederates? I further submit 
that our duty and our security require us to accept it speedily, unless we can get 
redress through the operation of the Government, or of the States of whose citizens 
we complain. To them we make this final appeal. Give us the compact; give us 
peace. Disturb no longer our domestic tranquillity. 

To make this appeal effectual, it is our duty at the South, first, to crush out the 
party divisions which exist among ourselves; to unite with all men who feel the 
wrongs of their country, and who are willing to unite for their redress; who have 
no alli'iation or sympathy with Black Republicanism in any of its forms, and are 
ready to drive them from the national councils. Let the enemies of this organiza- 
tion extend to each other cordially the right hand of fellowship, and, for pure and 
honest purposes, bring their past party differences and sacrifice them at the altar 
of patriotism. Thus, having secured our own union and harmony, let us appeal 
to the friends of the Constitution in the non-slaveholding States to imitate our ex- 
ample. Let us appeal to those of that class who are among, but not of, the public 
enemies themselves. Let us invoke them to join the army of the Con>titution. 
Let us call upon the American organization of the North, as well as the South, to 
enlist under its banners. Let us invoke, in a spirit of kindness and fraternity, 
those Democrats of the North who, from discontent upon a collateral i-sue, have 
withdrawn from the faithful column, and whose position gives aid and comfort to 
the common enemy, to return to iheir colors. I have no word of invocation to 
those who stand to-day in the ranks of the northern Democracy, but to remember 
and emulate their past history. From the beginning of this sectional controversy, 
they have stood firmly by the Constitution, in sunstiine and storm. No body of 
men, in the w^orld's history, ever exhibited higher or nobler devotion to principle 
under such adverse circumstances. 

The enemies of the Constitution, seeing that they were its last bulwark in the 



16 

non-slavelioklinp; States, have brought against tbem every engine of destruction ivlucli tlifeir mad- 
dened nmlice could invent. Their very loyalty to the Constitution is daily charged against theni 
as treason to their o\\-n firesides. Amid the opprobrious epithets, the jibes, and jeers of, the enemies 
of the Constitution; ■worse tlinn this: amid words of distrust and reproach even from men of the 
South, these great-lieartcd j)atriots have inarched steadil3- on in the path of duty. Amid treachery 
and desertion at home, and injustice from witlu^ut, amid disaster and defeat, they have risen supe- 
rior to fortune, and stand to-day, with their banners all tattered and soiled in the honorable service 
of the whole country, ready to renew the conflict and to snatcli victory from the very jaws of de- 
feat. No matter what fortune may betide us in the future; while life lasts I hare a hand that will 
succor and a heart ready to embrace the humblest soldier of this noble band. The union of all of 
these elements may yet secure to our conntiy j)eace and safety. But if this cannot be done, peace 
and safety arc incompatible in this Union; but there is safety and a glorious future for the South. 
She knows that liberty, in its last analysis, is but the blood of the brave. She is able to paj' the 
price and win the blessings. Is she ready? 

We occupy eight hundred and fifty thousand square miles of territorj', stretching from IMason and 
Pi.xon's line to the Mexican frontier — the fairest, the most fertRe, and the loveliest land that God 
ever gave to man: with noble rivers, bearing on their bosoms to the ocean the rarest and richest 
prodiu'ts of the earth, with capacious and commodious harbors, inviting the commerce of the world 
to take them to distant lands; with noble mountains, containing the richest and most useful ores 
and mineral.-; of the earth; with valleys and i)lains fertile and salulirious, inviting and rewarding 
the hand of industry; with forests unequalled in the beautj' and value of their products; with more 
than twelve million inhabitants, prosperous and attached and loyal to their social system; a loyalty 
so devoted, tliat neither the treason nor seditious teachings to whicli I have referred, nor brute force, 
have been able since the Revolution to seduce one hundred men, of any class or condition of her 
.society, from their allegiance to their homes and social system. Our people, after maintaining 
themselves in all the necessaries of life at honie, already export over two hundred million dollars' 
worth of their produce to all the great marts of the world. This country, capable of supporting a 
population larger than all Europe, is stronger in arms for her defence than all the five great powers 
of Europe put together. 

Sir, our whole country had but three million of population, including slaves, when she met old 
England in the struggle of the Revolution. We have four times that pojjulation, and one hundred 
times the wealth, of all the colonies combined. We are the sons of the same people. Look to our 
past record, in peace or in war. Look to the record, all covered over with honor; with iidelitj' to 
every engagement in peace or war; with heroic devotion to the common cause, wherever danger 
called for constancy and courage — -to the record of Virginia. She furnished the great leader of our 
armies in the Revolution, and many others, second to none but her own great son. Her statesmen 
jniided and directed your councils in that great struggle. The blood of her children was shed and 
their bone? bleached upon every l)attlc-field of the Revolution, from Quebec to Savannah. She 
carried upon her own shoulders two-thirds of all the burdens of the war of independence. 

Sir, the disloyal bauds of the descendants of the men of that daj' — men for whom these sacrifices 
were made — have shed the blood of her own sous on her own soil, and she owes it only to the loy- 
alty of her people that the whole Commonwealth w"as not wrapped in flames and in servile war; 
and the courage of these midnight assassins and cowardly traitors is the constant theme of senato- 
rial eloquence! Her sons and her grandsons, loyal to her institutions, loving her as a mother, ai'e 
scattered all over the plains and valleys and mountain-to[iS of this fair land, who feel deeply the 
wound to her honor. Every loyal heart \vithin the limits of her southern sisters l.ieats in unison 
with the feelings of these sons, and waits imt her signal gun to avenge her. They are ready and 
willing and anxious to hear this signal gun — "One blast from her Inigle horn were w^ortli a mil- 
lion men." 

Sir, I have but little more to add — nothing for myself. I feel that I have no need to pledge my 
jioor services to this great cause, to my country. My State has spoken for herself. Nine years ago 
a convention of her peoi)le met and declared that her connection with this government depended 
ui>ou the faithful execution of this fugitive slave law, and her full enjoyment of equal rights in the 
comnxui Territories. 1 have shown that the one contingency has already arrived; the other waits 
only the success of the Republican party in the approaching presidential election. I was a member 
of that convention, and stood then and now pledged to its action. I have faithfully labored to 
avert these calamities. I will yet labor until this last contingency hajipens, faithfully, honestly, and to 
the best of my poor abilities. When that times comes, freemen of Georgia redeem your pledge: I 
nm ready to redeem mine. Your honor is involved, your fiiih is plighted. I know you feel a 
Etain as a wouud; your peace, your social system, your firesides, are involved. Never permit this 
Tederal Government to pass into the traitorous hands of the Black Republican party. It has al- 
ready declared war against yon and your institutions. It every day commits acts of war against 
you; it has already compelled you to arm for your detence. Listen to "no vain babbling.s, " to no 
Ireaclierous jargon about "overt acts;" they have already been committed. Defend yourselves; 
the enemy is at your door; wait not to meet him at tiie hearthstone — meet him at the door-sill, and 
drive him from the temple of liberty, or pull down its jiillars and involve him in a common ruiw. 

Note. — Mr. Toombs regrets to see, from a recent reixirt of tlie CDmmittee of the Virginia legis- 
lature, tliat perhap.s he may be mistaken in excei)ting any of the non-slaveholding States this 
side of the Rocky mountains from infidelity to the Constitution, so far as the fugitive slave law 
is concerned. 



APPENDIX. 



Abstract of Laws passed by certain Kortliern States to nullify the Fugitive 
Slave laics of the United States. 

CoNNEHTicnT jmposcs a fine of $5,000 and imprisonment for five years, upon any person wJio shall 
ftseert that any free person is a slave, with intent to procure the reduction of such person into 
slavery; requires the testimony of at least two credible witnesses, or equivalent evidence, to prove 
the charge that any person being in, or having been in the State, is or was a slave; excludes testi- 
mony by deposition in such cases; imposes a fine of $5,000 and imprisonment for five years upon 
finy persoa who shall seize, or procure to be seized, any free person with intent to have such person 
held in slavery; punishes, with a year's imprisonment in the State prison, any person who shall 
obstruct any officer in executing process to arrest any ofFendef against the penal provisions of this 
statute; excepts persons claiming the service of apprentices for fixed terms from the penalties of 
liis statute, 

Maine imposes a fine of not exceeding $1,000, or a penalty of a year's confinement in the common 
jail, upon every State officer who shall arrest or detain, or aid in arresting or detaining in prison, 
any fugitive slave, 

Massachusetts forbids her judges and magistrates to take cognizance of the act of Congress con- 
cerning fugitive slaves passed in 1703, and prohibits her State officers from arresting fugitive slaves, 
or detaining them in her jails or public buildings. (24th M.irch, 1843. Revised Statutes Mass.) 
The provisions of the foregoing act are extended to the fugitive slave law passed by Congress ] 8th 
September, 1850, Massachusetts guaranties the habeas corpus, trial by jury, and the right of bail 
to fugitive slaves; pimishes. by a fine of from $1,000 to $5,000, and an imprisonment of from one 
to five years, any person other than the owner who shall aid in arresting or taking a fugitive slave 
out of the State; disqualifies her State officers from aiding to carry out the fugitive slave law; sul>- 
jects to impeachment any judge who shall act as a commissioner under the fugitive slave law; pun- 
ishes with fine and imprisonment any member of a militia comjiany who shall aid in the execution 
of the fugitive slave law; forbids the use of her State prisons for the confinement of any fugitive 
slave; [Act of May 2\st, 1855;) disqualifies commissioners of the United States under the fugitive 
slave law from holding any State judicial office, except that of justice of the peace, under certain 
limitations. (See Acts of 1858, Chap. 1T5.) 

Michigan directs the State attorneys to defend all fugitives claimed by their masters, and charges 
the costs of their defence upon the State; secures to fugitive slaves \\i& yvr'ii o^ habeas corpus, Xhe 
right of appeal to a supreme court, the trial by jury upon every issue of fact which may arise be- 
tween the fugitive and the claimant, and a right of bail in an amount to be fixed by the commit-» 
ting officer; prohibits the imprisonment of any fugitive slave in any jail in the State, and imposes a 
fine of from $500 to $1,000 upon any officer h.aving charge of a State jail who allows a fugitive 
ilave to be imprisoned therein; imposes a pen.alty of from three to five years' imprisonment upon 
any person who shall falsely represent that any free person is a slave, or who shall a.=sist in remov* 
ing any free person from the Slate as a slave; imposes a fine of from $500 to $1,000 upon any per- 
son who shall seize any free person, with intent to have such free person held in slavery; ro* 
quires at least two credible witnesses to prove the allegation that any fugitive is a slave; and ex- 
cepts from all ])enalties anv person who may claim for a fixed term the services of an apprentic<>, 
(Act of 13th Feb , 1855. 'Laws of Michigan, 1855 ) 

Directs sheriffs to receive into her prisons all jirisoners committed under federal jirocess, and au- 
thorizes them to receive pay for the same, bnt prohibits the sheriff' from admitting into the prisoni 
any fugitive slave under a penalty of $1,000 and one year's imprisonment in the county jail. (Rev. 
Stat. Michigan, 1856.) 

Imposes a fine of not exceeding $1,000, and imprisonment not exceeding ten years in the State 
prison, upon any person bringing a slave into tie State. Thus imposing a heavy and infamous 
penalty upon any master merely in transitu with his slave through the State. (Act of July 16th, 
1859. Laws of Michigan, 18S9.) 

2 



18 

Nbw Hampshire liberates bv statute any slave who shall come or be brought into, or be in the 
State, cither bv the consent of his master or involuntarily; makes it a felony, punishable with con- 
finement at hard labor for a term not less than one nor more than five years, to hold, or attempt to 
hold, in this State in slavery any person of any color for any length of time, or under any pretence; 
excepts from the foregoing penalties all acts lawfully done by any officer of the United States, or 
other person, in the eiecution of any legal process. 

Ohio attempts to nullify the law of Congress concerning fugitive slavee by a judicial interprettt- 
tion of her habeas corpus act. 

Rhodk Island forbids any sheriff, or other ofTicer, from arresting or detaining any fugitive slave 
under a penalty of ^500, or imprisonment for not less than six months. 

Veemont denies the power of the District Court of the United States to issue a writ of habeas 
corpus, except upon proceedings pending in said court; emancipates the slave of a master passing 
through the State, and pledges the whole power of the Stiite to maintain the claim of the slave to 
freedom. 




LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



011 895 897 4 



